Ian Hutchinson: Nuclear Fusion, Plasma Physics, and Religion | Lex Fridman Podcast
Vložit
- čas přidán 19. 06. 2024
- Ian Hutchinson is a nuclear engineer and plasma physicist at MIT. He has made a number of important contributions in plasma physics including the magnetic confinement of plasmas seeking to enable fusion reactions, which is the energy source of the stars, to be used for practical energy production. Current nuclear reactors are based on fission as we discuss. Ian has also written on the philosophy of science and the relationship between science and religion.
Support this podcast by supporting our sponsors:
- Sun Basket, use code LEX: sunbasket.com/lex
- PowerDot, use code LEX: powerdot.com/lex
EPISODE LINKS:
Ian's Website: www-internal.psfc.mit.edu/~hu...
Can a Scientist Believe in Miracles? (book): amzn.to/30aooVT
Monopolizing Knowledge (book): amzn.to/2Xb2a4q
PODCAST INFO:
Podcast website:
lexfridman.com/podcast
Apple Podcasts:
apple.co/2lwqZIr
Spotify:
spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
RSS:
lexfridman.com/feed/podcast/
Full episodes playlist:
• Lex Fridman Podcast
Clips playlist:
• Lex Fridman Podcast Clips
OUTLINE:
0:00 - Introduction
5:32 - Nuclear physics and plasma physics
8:00 - Fusion energy
35:22 - Nuclear weapons
42:06 - Existential risks
50:29 - Personal journey in religion
56:27 - What is God like?
1:01:34 - Scientism
1:04:21 - Atheism
1:06:39 - Not knowing
1:09:57 - Faith
1:13:46 - The value of loyalty and love
1:23:26 - Why is there suffering in the world
1:35:08 - AGI
1:40:27 - Consciousness
1:48:14 - Simulation
1:52:20 - Adam and Eve
1:54:57 - Meaning of life
CONNECT:
- Subscribe to this CZcams channel
- Twitter: / lexfridman
- LinkedIn: / lexfridman
- Facebook: / lexfridmanpage
- Instagram: / lexfridman
- Medium: / lexfridman
- Support on Patreon: / lexfridman - Věda a technologie
I really enjoyed this conversation with Ian. Here's the outline:
0:00 - Introduction
5:32 - Nuclear physics and plasma physics
8:00 - Fusion energy
35:22 - Nuclear weapons
42:06 - Existential risks
50:29 - Personal journey in religion
56:27 - What is God like?
1:01:34 - Scientism
1:04:21 - Atheism
1:06:39 - Not knowing
1:09:57 - Faith
1:13:46 - The value of loyalty and love
1:23:26 - Why is there suffering in the world
1:35:08 - AGI
1:40:27 - Consciousness
1:48:14 - Simulation
1:52:20 - Adam and Eve
1:54:57 - Meaning of life
Lex , with all due respect your the only person I look upto...please keep making videos...I watch everyone of your videos. loads of love..I keep saying this againa and again.love you
David Deutsch please!
@Lex Fridman I am researching ball lightning phenomena, and came across these videos which seem to describe a new particle or phenomena, that may be related to nuclear physics and plasma physics. I would be interested in other people looking at this and help reject or verify the phenomena discussed. Here are the videos I found:
Magnetic Signature of Strange Radiation (4 parts)
czcams.com/video/oEyxKFUqvU0/video.html
czcams.com/video/QJxr3WnLQAc/video.html
czcams.com/video/rtDd3PuGTyM/video.html
czcams.com/video/9QLJQHqu_KY/video.html
Ian didn't do a good job of talking to you about God, Religion, Scientism, Atheism or Faith. Go to Stephen C. Meyer, or David Berlinski. Or maybe just straight talk to a theologian like Taylor Marshall or at the very least an apologist like Matt Fradd.
Please ask Putin what is God like. My father was working with him for many years. I hear from many researchers that God is Lucifer = AI.
I love how well spoken Ian is. His masterful use of the English language is such a treat in today’s world.
that maybe because in england we speak english. lol
Thats crazy I thought we didn't have a modern einstein
@@moodfm5673 Can I please get a source for that?
You need a well spoken sycophant to promote the industry's monotonous and unimaginative posture over the decades that.........here we go........." Yeah, there was a radiation leak, but nothing to worry about here." I'm 75 and across all these years I have NEVER heard the AEC acknowledge ANY hazard from ANY radiation leak.........despite.......statistical evidence that screams of the opposite reslity.
Don’t mistake high verbal IQ with substance
Greatly appreciate how Lex managed to probe Ian's faith without challenging it in a confrontational manner. A conversation between two first class human beings. Thanks to both gentleman.
Couldn't agree more!! We need more of these kind of peaceful discussions between groups of various thoughts and convictions!
Excellent podcast. Talking to people with views different from your own and being able to do so with curiosity and with a genuine quest for ideas and without any acrimony in truly refreshing.
Yes, Lex did a great job handling the Christianity discussion and I'm glad that he included this in the discussion.
In that spirit, I tried to maintain an open and interested mind through it too, but I found Hutchinson's answers to be very disappointing.
For starters I think he created a straw man with his concept of scientism - who really discards the value of history or other things that don't allow for scientific analysis?
And even on the most obvious and fundamental problem - why suffering - he could do nothing more than dance around the issue and try to undermine even the idea of looking for a reasonable answer. Keep in mind that it is his all powerful God that created this world, so why didn't that God simply create a world that could maintain consistency and meaning without the need for extreme suffering and injustice?
@@TomsDone I agree that his beliefs are on very shaky ground. I won't go into specifics of his arguments but in general when subjected to scrutiny theists have a way about them where they portray their beliefs as very generic and completely in the realm of the unknown so that they can say this is something science can't answer so I will choose to believe X, however they bandy about very specific notions of religion when speaking to fellow theists which are not at all in the unknown realm. I doubt there will ever be a way to change people's religious beliefs through argument, there has to be a consciousness raising event in their life which brings them to the right conclusion.
I do think there are a few smart theists who adhere to the falsehoods of religion in name only, not necessarily maliciously, rather to be able to continue to participate in their communities and to hold on to their identities. They also probably recognize some of the memetically evolutionary benefits of religion despite its tenuous hold on reality, and so stand by it knowing fully well that it is turtles all the way down.
What I enjoyed most about this video was the patience and openness which Lex afforded him despite having a polar opposite point of view, I would like to be able to incorporate that kind of patience in my own interactions. Also some of the nuclear physics stuff was pretty interesting too.
@@anoopramakrishna For: "patience and openness which Lex afforded him";
Firstly, How do you know he has the polar opposite view?
Secondly, Lex asked the questions about religion and faith etc. of course he is required to be kind to his guest; the fact that you take this as "affording" is nothing but an insulting act.
@@bigbangind "How do you know he has the polar opposite view?" I've been watching this channel from before the podcast started, so I made some educated guesses about Lex's stand on religion. However it is true that I can't authoritatively state that and probably my use of the superlative here was inappropriate.
For the second point, maybe I was unclear in what I meant. You are right that Lex invited the guest and the onus of basic propriety is on him. Perhaps I projected my own feelings onto the conversation a little more than I should have, however when looked at just as a conversation between two very accomplished people with different views and to be able to do so with mutual respect and patience it gives me some hope that such open conversations can happen in general between people with different opinions, I might be extrapolating too much, but one can hope :)
@@TomsDone well, with issue of suffering there's one underlying problem, it is very emotional subject, that allows rejections of ideas on emotional basis. So i think he tried to focus on that, instead of on rational argument. Personally what i understand from the way he answered on that, is that he basically implied, that no matter what he said, it wouldn't be convincing enough, because for many people (sooner or later for everyone) it is emotional issue and emotions will overpower reason anyway, so it's better to be dealt on emotional level.
As far as i understand it from the Bible, the suffering isn't something that God allowed, it is something that people chose. The suffering or goodness weren't created by God. It may sounds cheesy and beaten up as an argument, but it doesn't make it any less viable: evil is an absence of God. God could maintain world without suffering only one way - by forcing Himself in our lives and our decisions, basically making impossible for humans to make decisions that would go against God's will. But thing is, for God our freedom is much more important, than our safety of well-being. He could create creatures that wouldn't have a choice but to do what He wanted (in fact, in Christianity there are such creatures - angels), but He wanted to create something, that would hold His image, and the most distinct quality God had in universe before humans - was His freedom. We don't know why He wantes to create other free beings, but He did, and as a part of freedom, He offered Adam and Eve either to follow Him, or depart ways. They chose the latter (does not matter here if you believe in a story of Adam and Eve itself, it's just the idea behind that story). Why didn't God planted the Tree of Knowledge outside the garden? Or why did He planted it at all? Basically the answer is that He offered fhem choice. I don't even think that it was some special tree, it may have been some random one, and knowledge of good and evil came not from supernatural qualities of the fruit, bit from the experience. When Adam and Even decided to go against God, make Him absent from their decision making process, they experienced something new, something that they have never experienced before - evil. And that made them understand what evil is and, most importantly, what good was. Basically when good was norm for them, they didn't know it.
So basically very first story in Bible explains to us, why evil exists in a world, and answer is - our freedom. Choosing between good and good, or better to say God and God wouldn't be freedom. But choosing between God and absence of God - is.
I don't know how well i was able to present my thoughts here, considering also that English isn't my first language and i never engaged in serious religious discussions in this language, so i just hope that it's understandable at all. Also the whole issue of good and evil and free will and original sin are so huge, that explaining it in short and very clear form is very hard.
Btw, i also am very surprised, that in debates almost no theologian is using this argument. There can be reason for that though, because in Christianity there are denominations (and very prominent ones, for that matter, Catholicism for example) that don't believe in freedom of will. So maybe Ian is a part of such denomination, who knows, but this argument is the most obvious one from the Bible itself.
A few months back CZcams started offering your videos on my feed as something I might like to watch. More recently I decided to start checking the videos out, and I have to say, I've become an enormous fan of these long-form interviews, and your ability to conduct them with not just the appropriate level of intellectual rigor, but with the appropriate level of kindness compassion and good-will. Frankly I now see you as the thinking mans version of Joe Rogan.
About this particular interview, I think it speaks volumes that you can conduct productive interviews with both Ian and Dawkins, and I mean that as a significant compliment. While I describe myself as a Spiritual Agnostic (meaning I feel we are greater than the sum of our parts and we cannot fully understand our intrinsic nature purely by a study of our physical components *thus Spiritual* and that we cannot define God, meaning it makes no sense to argue the existence or non-existence of something we cannot define *thus Agnostic* )
I found myself enjoying much of his wisdom, even though I do not share his underlying belief system, for the simple reason that it simply does not seem rational to believe in a personal God. What I will say is that I become more and more convinced that what someone believes is far less important than who they become because of it. Perhaps it is even the reverse: That some people have an innate calling towards love kindness and compassion, and that religion offers them a way to grow that part of their existence, and science and rational thought might only serve as a barrier to them taking that journey. Who am I to say that such a path is wrong? My path feels different, and as much as I disagree with a lot of his talking points, I won't let that blind me to the simple truth that this is a good man who on balance can and does make the world a better place.
Wow I love this comment so much! I try not to put labels on things but spiritual agnostic is such a great way to describe how I feel as well.
_"I feel we are greater than the sum of our parts and we cannot fully understand our intrinsic nature purely by a study of our physical components thus Spiritual"_
Could this spiritual component consist of a sort of emergent behavior like consciousness (not that I have a clue what that even is, but it surely must be dependent on the function of the brain) or do you require a component that is independent of the physical universe (like a soul)?
@@lordkekz4 I have no way of knowing this but I think it makes more sens to think it is emergent which certainly fits with my personal view that the mind and body are intrinsically connected. One minor proof I have of this is that when I look after my body it seems to help the health of my mind also.
I’m trying to answer your question for myself. I need to ask, what do you mean by “physical universe”? Do you consider energy independent of the physical universe? Light? Seems like nothing is independent of the universe (and why add “physical”?) My guess is, your question is sort of creating a scenario that doesn’t really make sense merely for the sake of having a question, but I could be wrong.
@@mrroberts9230 With physical universe I mean everything that is subject to the laws of physics and is part of our universe. Anything we can emiprically detect (like matter, light, energy, the fundamental forces) is by definition part of the physical universe. I think the distinction between the physical universe and possibly metaphysical entities (like souls or spirits) makes sense to ask for a question, as the latter cannot be reasoned about using empirical science.
Mr. Hutchinson is so good at explaining complex thoughts in an easily understandable way
Yup
Really? He seems to be going through mental pretzels to explain his views in xtianity.
Lex is so great too. “Cognizant of the fact the he/we know very little...” this is the humility we all need, while maintaining our ability to be curious, the learn and to think. 🙏
Either he's got interesting facial expressions that make him look like he's smiling, or he's just super stoked about the subject and literally constantly smiles throughout the video. I hope it's the latter :)
Lex is known to smile uncontrollably.
Ian is fantastic at conveying difficult ideas in a simple manner. Thanks for this Lex.
That is the definition that of a great communicator. Someone who can explain difficult things simply.
Loved the fact that you Lex allowed Ian to discuss his beliefs with such enthusiasm without abruptly disregarding it as fairy tale.
As a Christian I must say that in intellectual discussion believe structures are often shrugged off as irrelevant and obsolete.
Would love to see more intellectual discussions with you where actual interest in perspective is discussed around belief structures.
10/10
Keep up the great platform and awesome to see you try your best!!
Shout out to Rogan for the introduction to this great channel.
Yeah, it was awesome to see a non christian genuinely trying to understand a Christian viewpoint.
just spent two hours on CZcams (watching this) and actually feel like I've spent that time very wisely... what a brilliant conversation!
He looks like the scientists from Half Life 1
...as played by Timothy Dalton
Geraldo Rivera
They're waiting for you Fridman, *in the test chamber*
There is a world in your dreams mr freeman and I need to go there!!
I didn't see him complaining about having to use these ridiculous ties
"We seem to be more afraid of shark attacks than car accidents" is a brilliant way of simply explaining to non-scientific people the importance of well-defined interpretation of data.
I hear the beaches were empty after Jaws was released... no rise in shark attacks to justify the fear, just media induced.
Well you wont get into a car crash in shallow waters and you wont get attacked by a shark on dry land, so thats something to consider.
@@powerarmor9375 My mother never went back into the ocean ever again, having seen it in a theater when she was pregnant with me.
@@johngrunwell6101 more risk riding in a car i'd assume. I just imagine the media's effects are far more powerful when were told its real rather than fiction
@@powerarmor9375 One way or another, Jaws was effective enough to traumatize her!
It's really refreshing to see someone speak their truth and express their faith so openly! Wether or not you agree with him is up to you, but this type of openness is definitely becoming more and more rare. Also kudos to Lex for listening to something he doesn't necessarily agree with 👍
Lex, please get someone from ITER on the podcast!
Or someone from Tokamak Energy!
Steven Cowley czcams.com/video/SMxOvuSMAug/video.html
@@axiom1650 do you think that Lex would be willing to do a "virtual" interview? The current travel rules would make it impossible to do an in person interview with someone from either of those companies.
Just watched Lex's episode with Dennis Whyte (Ian's colleague) on the same subject, and it's fascinating how much sharper Lex has become, how much more pertinent his questions are, and how much more value he extracts for his listeners.
I truly enjoyed this podcast, even if I'm not a religious person I can understand and empathize with everything he said about God, the meaning of life etc etc
Great work lex,your open mindedness and romanticism is a humble characteristic that pulls you closer to truth
It is really good to see a scientist who can wear different glasses. Usually people hold only one glasses scientism, atheism, relegion, capitalism and so on. Today I will start to broaden my type of glasses (listening music, watching arts, praying). Hence creating different and new relationship with "my" mind and "my" soul. Thank you I hope to see more of these kind of conversation.
Thank you lex
Thank you for having Dr. Hutchinson on your podcast. We've had him on as well. I'm grateful that you have an open mind as to what he had so say and encourage you to continue to have scientists and technologists who are also people of faith on your show.
What a refreshing breath of air this podcast was.Thanks Mr.Fridman and your guest.
it is amazing that he can talk about Adam & Eve and hard science with equal intensity, that is true mental dexterity.
He seemed like a nice guy till he got all religious then I zoned out, a man of logic being illogical
People will believe what they want to believe - whether this guy is a nuclear physicist or not, he has the right to make up whatever he feels will comfort him, spiritually (happens to be christianity, instead of whoaaah dude we’re all one collective consciousness).
I am not advocating for institutionalised religion or especially for example like in Islamic countries where the state practically enforces it and denies basic human rights, culturally, based on religion, but I think individuals can comfort themselves in in the spiritual ways that they want.
He is a nuclear scientist after all, not a philosopher, not an historian - any person, even the one who delves in and deals with crazy concepts like fusion can go through mental gymnastics that will ultimately result in a certain belief. Still, he does seem to draw “sciency” rationale behind the belief. While I have no trouble with Christianity itself, there seems to always be a disconnect - sure, our western society was built on Christianity, or perhaps barbarism was tamed by Christian teachings. Ideas are like mind viruses after all? The simple dilemma I have is how can one take any religion seriously? Does he think other religions are valid too or only Christianity - the one true religion and God?? That is always where I fail to understand the reasoning behind faith that one out of god knows how many religions is true. For each person their own “faith” to their own personal god may very well be true. To call upon Christianity as if it was something more valid compared to other religions is just not fair. Imagine a scale which weighs how problematic any given religion is. Would the Pagan ones be the heaviest? Would Christianity be the “best weighted” one???
All in all, Humans are not cold logical machines, we are fleshbags that literally decay more with each day. Is it that hard to understand people like him can have these beliefs and still be experts in scientific fields given the nature we ALL succumb to (death?)
@Irving Ceron Manifestly or directly demonstrative; spec. in Logic, Setting forth a general principle manifestly including the proposition to be proved.
A wise man once said if you burn all the science books and all the non science or nonsense books in a thousand years all the science books would be rewritten there'd still be nonsense books but different nonsense books!
That seems pretty logical!
@Amusis I'm always learning so no I don't think I know everything!
But as science advances we re write our books to be a more accurate representation of our world, most if not all religions believe things that are obviously not factually accurate that's not confirmation bias that's facts lol
@Amusis Yes but even if any evidence of that is found - it will not be a god in any sense made up by humans. ALL gods are made up by humans (either an oral tradition passed down or books). It is not stupid to assume all religions are just fiction. You do not see me praising Avengers as the heroes of earth after all.
Lex I love your interviews - they're so satisfying to listen to because you seem to pick up on all the questions that were lurking in my own mind :) It really is a journey of discovery to go along with you.
Lex is a good podcaster. No, He’s a GREAT podcaster. I foresee lex passing Joe Rogan. Mainly because Lex is more interesting.
He's also a lot more intelligent, and his questions are infinitely better. My worry for his podcasts growth is that intellectuals generally do not draw a wide audience.
They are different, both do great conversations
Lets see Lex talk after smoking a blunt!
These are great replies. Lex and Joe have similar but different shows. Lex is natured so that he's easy to talk to. Rogan has been about 10 different shows at this point and the move to Spotify has brought even more change
They are geared towards entirely different audiences and I enjoy them both, when I'm feeling intellectual, I watch lex, If I just want to watch some guys kick it back and talk shit, I watch Joe. Lex himself said this when he went on the JRE that the people who recognize him on the streets from his appearance on there are Markedly different than those who know him from his podcast.
Thank God you introduced me to Ian hes my favorite scientist now
That’s sweetly amusing. I agree.
Excellent interview.
The nuclear scientists often give the best interviews in my opinion - your dad included!
Hutchinson is a very clear and likeable speaker.
At around 1:15 I suspect he hasn't read The Selfish Gene, though.
He should, as it points out the biological underpinnings of what he's talking about, namely the origin of benevolence and perhaps even faith.
interesting ... a selfish gene allowing us to suffer for others ... would not have thought of that ..
@@danellwein8679 Neither would I but for the clear reasoning provided by Dawkins and others. Natural selection finds and utilises every available resourse to advantage living things, the carrier of the genes. It is the genes (and gene combinations) in us and all other living things that carry through the generations, randomly mutating but naturally selected to weed out the ones that can't compete from those who carry a slight advantage. If you're not convinced but are curious then I strongly recommend reading a book on natural selection. The Selfish Gene is a good one but there are others. Darwin's book On the Origin of Species is also valid, although perhaps a bit tedious for some, and predates our knowledge of DNA and genes.
This conversation is great. Mr. Hutchinson explain things very clearly. Lex asks great questions, which keeps the conversation interesting.
Thank you Lex I just found your channel this week. I'm so grateful an thankful to have found your podcast. Thank you again an your guests for all the knowledge you share. Sending positive energy. 💜💫
As an engineer I very much look up to Ian and his work :)
I don't understand what is the clear evidence of Jesus resurection. But is interesting to listen to him. Great work Lex. Thanks a lot
I don't even see why the resurrection of Jesus is some kind of evidence for the existence of God. Multiple people have been resurrected in the Bible.
a bunch of bronze age cult members with low quality and highly motivated reasoning think they saw zombie Jesus
apparently its "strong historical evidence" which is a kind of evidence based on allowing people to convince you of things and finding meaning in being loyal to the belief in those ideas. he is saying we all do this by stretching the meaning of faith and it's arbitrary whether or not you believe scientism as your faith system or religion. he gets more meaning from religion.
I did wonder what he was referring to with resurrection. Im sure theres plenty of cases of Romans crucifing people but actually being dead then revived after a period of days.
Hey Jonatan, so the evidence that he might've been meaning might be this which I've internalized over my lifetime.
First one is the proof that Jesus was a man who led a religious revolution and was crucified for it. This was recorded by the Roman Record keeper Tacitus. You can look up information about him, but basically he is a trusted source on many other historical facts so it would be silly to not trust him when it came to recording Jesus's crucifixion without good evidence.
If we accept Jesus was crucified, another thing that we can look into is early recorded (like on paper) conversation/debates where Jews and Christians argued about the resurrection of Jesus. The Jews at the time didn't argue that the tomb didn't become empty, they argued that the tomb was empty but the disciples stole the body. These conversations were recorded in the new testament, though I believe that there was a conversation recorded in 200 AD outside of the Bible where the Jews has basically the same argument I listed earlier.
Another point is that the disciples listed the place where Jesus was buried so really anyone could have gone and seen the tomb and found Jesus was missing, so it really does seem like the tomb was emptied and either some of his followers stole the body or he resurrected.
If you accept the tomb was emptied you then go through the two possibilities was it body theft or was it resurrection. One counter to the disciples stealing the body is that there were roman soldiers guarding the tomb, and this makes sense since Jesus was a religious revolutionary that in the Romans minds threatened to destabilize things. So since Jesus claimed he would resurrected in 3 days, it was in the Roman's best interests to make sure he stayed buried. Anyways the main point is it would be kind of impossible for the disciples who were fishermen to beat trained roman soldiers. Though we are talking about resurrection which is already kinda impossible, so this point is just to reinforce the other points.
The other thing is that the in the Bible the first witnesses to Jesus's resurrection were women, and at the time women were treated as untrustworthy sources. So if the resurrection was fabricated in order to gain followers at the time, then they would've said it was men who were the first witnesses since that would've helped their case way more. In fact, the witnessed being women was probably detrimental in some capacity all the way up to the the women's rights movement in the early 1900s. So unless the disciples could see the future, that part doesn't make sense if it was a fabricated testimony.
The other proof is the many witnesses to Jesus walking around after being resurrected during that time. There is an account of Jesus appearing to over 500 people, and Paul writes this to say 'if you or anyone has doubts, then go ask them since some of those people are still alive' 1st Corinthians was written about 20 years after Jesus's death (53 AD), so it was definitely intended for the people at the time.
The other one would be the disciples dying in the name of Jesus. Since if they did steal the body and lied about their testimony, then it would make no sense for them to die for a religion they didn't believe in. Another one would be Paul's conversion the Christianity and his death for christ too.
There's more evidence that this too, but these are the big ones to think about. There of course counter arguments to the points I just made, and so I think its important for you to check the validity of those counter arguments and the arguments for the resurrection. Also keep in mind Mark is also the earliest record of Jesus's life dating at least back to 70 AD but possibly earlier (that's just the earliest dated copy we found). Hope this helps, it took me 2 or 3 years of constantly going through all the arguments for and against Christianity, till I was able to comfortably say I believe Christianity to be true. And I've always looked at arguments for and against and still do, I just had a lot of restless nights during that 2 or 3 years.
Thank you Lex. That was your best, IMO. I like the range of influencers you are getting to. Keep it up.
Ian's descriptive style of speech makes understanding high energy physics simple, straightforward, and easy to understand. Excellent interview Lex. You've surpassed my expectations yet once again.
I enjoy your conversations with these high minded intellectuals, keep it up!
Lex, thank you for your honest world class presentations. MIT is proving once again that it attracts the top of the top. You make Russia proud, as well as your brilliant Dad. Best wishes
Thank you for these amazing podcasts, and your open-mindedness is quite admirable. Keep doing what you are doing!
Lex, you're interviews are awesome Lex. I'm really enjoying them!
Thank you, sir, for your work on plasma physics and nuclear fusion. I was sad to hear that you might retire by the time ITER will be operational, don't give up. You have done so much majestic work and I am sure you can finish the fight.
Thanks Lex, this is a great birthday present.
Why. Does lex Fridman look like he's about to laugh when doing ads?😂😂😂
Probably self-consciousness and discomfort. It's easy to feel a little embarrassed when reading an advertisement.
Also, he realizes how ridiculous it sounds reading their scripts. Probably feels awkward having not sold his soul yet.
Thanks Lex for doing this conversation on science and Christianity. I really enjoyed it and think it's an important conversation.
In all seriousness, this was utterly awesome, thank you.
I don't say this often but here it goes: I love you Lex and everything that are you are doing for us out here. Thank you and please keep going ❤️
All I can say is “WOW!”. What an awesome discussion. Thanks for this Lex.
Thank you for covering many different topics!
Maybe one of the funkiest accents I've ever heard. Continent spanning!
Excellent conversation.
I am truly addicted to this channel at the moment, thank you for this content Lex!
What a great physicist and a great human being. His speech and manners inspire a long list of positive adjectives.
Thank you for your work Ian Hutchinson. It is highly valued and is priceless knowledge to enable the next generations
This guy is an excellent science communicator.
Brilliant! One of my favorite episodes. Ian Hutchinson is a remarkable scientist.
Thank you for always including an outline to your podcast interviews. Got here from watching Yannis Pappas. Personally prefer taking an online or uni course to learn about things, but also enjoyed this content!
Hi Lex. I saw a lot of comments with interviewee requests. I think that the people that you´re inviting to your podcasts are great and your questions as well. Keep it up with your great job and your great questions.
This is such a good example of explaining complex systems in a understandable way. Must be awesome to attend hos lectures.
This guest killed it, the science is far above me, however the faith speak the was much needed. Great show.
thank you for this. great conversation.
I did what you said and paused the podcast to order my dinners from Sunbasket! They DO look delicious!
Thanks for this podcast. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I visited both of the sponsors and listened to the ad. The temptation to skip is strong.
Indeed it is but hey I like some of his podcasts. This one was really good .
1:11:00
I haven't finished the talk yet, but I disagree somewhat with his statements here. When people say "faith" in the context of religion, they certainly do mean "belief in that which is unproven to a sufficient standard". The English language is ambiguous so we do use the word "faith" for several related concepts. He argues for "faith" meaning confidence in something. But when I drive in a car, the "faith" in the engineering is simply and identically equal to "confidence", a confidence earned through a measurable demonstration of previous success.
Likewise, "faith" defined as "loyalty" to others is meaningless. All humans have loyalty to something to some degree, even if to their own desires. Using it this way cheapens the word as every human in existence has "faith" by this definition.
He's conflating these meanings and I believe it is intentional. It's an attempt to legitimize the first usage of faith which he wants to justify possessing. Yes, we all make decisions with partial information continually on a daily basis. But, the difference is that someone who does not have faith in a deity is making a choice with limited information on hand, whereas a person of faith is adding to that an additional piece of information that does not stem from observation, but from a desire for something to be true of nature. It is adding an internal bias above and beyond what was observable.
Aaron Schooley Plenty of people who do not want religious feeling to be true come around due to direct experiences... I would say that the organizations that claim to be religious are to be suspected of foul play as a result of existing, but there is a lot more going on with spiritual experiences than hopeful or wishful thinking...
@@0ooTheMAXXoo0 science has taught us over and over and over again that personal experiences are not to be trusted one iota.
@@0ooTheMAXXoo0 A perspective to be considered.
Faith in the bible is that though, it says it clearly that believing in what you cannot see
Yeah, there's faith, the trust you talk of when driving a car, and then there's the other Faith which you later mention. Like there's truth and Truth.
When people use the words without defining what they mean, and then also use the words interchangeably, you get the good Doctor here... Mmm, so when Christians talk of Faith and faith I will ask them to define, and then to also use the word trust, instead of the word faith, as it makes things simpler to understand.
Really loved this podcast, once again thanks Lex for allowing open platform where different ideas and views can be explored, one of most interesting discussion iv heard from a christian thinker.
Lex, I don't know much about your background, or even who you are, but mate, this is the best CZcams channel I've ever seen, thank you for such great work. Amazing interview!
Lex is a Russian speaking immigrant. He has a PhD from MIT in computer science/artificial intelligence.
This was very interesting. Thank you.
I appreciate Ian's honesty about the real time-line for fusion energy and his support fission energy. This man must understand the first law of thermodynamics, unlike our current political leadership. A great next topic could be on thorium fission. Get on that Lex!
What a great explanation of the Gospel, in an easily digestible way.
Love this talk.
Lex...you rock man!!! I love your humility! I was once a Christian myself...but I am a "why" guy....and have to many questions that I can't just write off by saying..."I will ask God when I get there"...I just know there are many mysteries and that I don't know it all....so I am always searching and learning because I am willing.
As always Lex, I appreciate your time and efforts in keeping us educated in many areas of science and science fiction - May your meaning of life, be rewarding. Peace ✌️
Do I read a veiled shot at Christianity or something else spoken about today?
A really good talk! Thanks Lex!
Mr. Lex Fridman, all of your content is valuable and pleasant. Salute from Michoacan, Mexico.
It is an honor to know these type of scientists exist
This podcast is a joy.
I love this guy, thank you Ian for the enlightened conversation!
Astarte desire to press the like button after just hearing the announcements of the coming talk where I find points that I highly relate to (like about the overreach of science and the monopoly of knowledge).
Great podcast. I love how even though Lex doesn’t believe in religion he doesn’t doubt it once to Ian, talks to him as he’s interested and not shamming him. Awesome perspective! May god bless you both.
A very interesting interview, thanks Lex!
What an INCREDIBLE podcast
I really enjoyed learning about the fusion and ITER. Regarding the second part; the historical tales of the divine existence is subjective to the narrative suffering and greatly differ with the temporality of events. The unbearable loneliness of the individual entity without a form of social organization, makes us act and believe in accordance with our environment. The comfort of beatitude often prevails doubts ;)
Great content as usual, thank you Lex.
I am so glad that Lex let his guests express their points of views as long as they need and it is great that this scientist explains his faith with complete confidence. He clearly knows the Bible and has spend time with God. He speaks in a wonderful way, so that normal people can understand all the sience stuff. Furthermore, he is very peaceful and respectful. He is not old-fashioned. This is the fashion which is always is in- fashion. People who criticise his "belief sysyem" without any respect are very often jealous folks, or people lost in nonsens, or some are too lazy and coward to search God. Brave or desperate ir curious people search God and will find him. Of course, he was never dead as Nietzsche said. Very intelligent people like poor Nietzsche believe often to be at the same level or even above God, but of course cannot understand the Theodezie Question and other stuff like the Sinnesfragen, so they have to "kill" God ...
And we humans (specially the clever ones) must be HUMBLE enough to know, that even we can create many complicated Engineering stuff and AI, and wonerful art and music and so on, men will never understand everything that exists because we are ONLY humans (es gibt keine Übermenschen, wir sind einfach nur Menschen).
The Theodezie Question cannot be answered by men, is not meant to be answered, otherwise there would not be any reason for this life ...
So glad this intelligent man explains many things so well, and I believe too.
Awesome podcast this one thank you very much Lex
Great guest, interview. Enjoyed every moment of it. Thank you very much.
Amazing podcast, Ian is so vivid and clear speaker
Are these videos being archived somewhere? One of the few CZcams channels that hold discourse worthy of it in my opinion.
Is it only me or someone else also finds him lookalike of slightly more aged Bryan Cranston.
YES! I was searching for this comment 👍
... Lex Fridman is the most irresistible individuality in the small world of transhumanism, and his guest is of unfathomable depth; I love you, and wish you the best that life can bring.
1:20:42
Lex "ball sports are silly" Fridman
love you!
Lex is absolutely an awesome podcaster. He is very interesting. I struggle with his narrow inflexion though. Perhaps Ben Stein is an influence of his.
Lex, good introduction, with which I completely agree, including the reference to Solaris, which I don't remember so well after forty years, but saw Stanislaw Lem being ashamed by the homonymous movie....Congrats 🌟
Thank you Lex. Glad we exist at the same time. Pretty cool.
I really like this guy. He explains things so well and seems like a very nice guy
Seekers of truth can pursue it in science and religion. Love it.
Awesome podcast!!! Great job
Yesss, a very interesting way to understand the mind!
Ty Lex love all your podcasts!
I did not expect Stanisław Lem quote here. Great author, philosopher.
Clearly explained. Thank you.
,,It would be nightmare to have yourself downloaded on a computer”. Couldnt agree more Ian !
Again this podcast is surely and steadily turning into a beacon of knowledge guiding curious souls to the shores of wisdom.
And Lex's open-mindedness and curiosity with that pinch of innocent naivety is a marvel. Truly a very interesting conversation as always and very interesting questions with no sign of prejudgment, ill will or any hidden intentions. *Just Lex Asking With Love*
Well done Lex, you a great dude.
That was quite different and very interesting indeed!
This is the first guy I’ve seen come on a podcast with actual “intelligence” in a long time